andyman618

Gerry is a beautiful looking movie. Harris Savides' cinematography showing the beauty and desolation of the desert is breathtaking.

That being said, Gerry is also an incredibly boring movie. It's the story of two not-so-bright individuals lost in the desert. They walk and walk and walk. And then....get this...they walk some more! About the most interesting thing that happens is one of them gets stuck on top of a big rock and they spend a while trying to figure out how to get him down. The little dialogue there is is inane and uninteresting. Lost in the desert you'd think they'd have something more important to talk about than Wheel of Fortune or a computer game.

I guess this is an experiment in minimalism or something, and director Gus Van Sant is trying to show us the hopelessness of the situation these two nimrods find themselves in. No, scratch that. The situation they have put themselves in. But Van Sant seems to have forgotten that the soul of drama (and comedy, for that matter) is conflict. There is almost no conflict in this movie. The two characters call each other Gerry, and although you might think that their situation would pit them against each other, it doesn't. They have one or two mild arguments, but nothing significant. I know some people might say the conflict is between their hostile environment and themselves, but the desert is just as passive as the Gerries are. It's big and it's hot, and there is no water, but that's it.

Here's an example of one of the sequences in this movie that some folks might find interesting, but I didn't: One of the Gerries is sitting on a rock, looking pretty dejected. The camera does a very slow revolve around him; 360 degrees....very...sloowly. The the pint of view shifts to his surroundings and starts a very slow pan of the surrounding countryside. 360 degrees...very...slooowly. That's it.

Gerry is a beautiful film, but almost completely uninvolving. I'd rather look at a book of Ansel Adams photographs.

Joy Ride is a helluva movie. Basically an homage to Stephen Spielberg's 1971 made-for-TV classic Duel, it's the story of three young people being terrorized by a malevolent trucker.

On his way to pick up his girlfriend from college, Lewis Thomas (Paul Walker) stops to bail his loser brother Fuller (Steve Zahn) out of jail. They pass the time by taunting a trucker on their CB radio. Of course the trucker turns out to be a psycho who terrorizes them until they finally think they've appeased him by offering him their abject apologies. But once Lewis and Fuller pick up Lewis' girlfriend (Leelee Sobieski), things start right up again with increased intensity, and the realization that this isn't just any trucker. A sense of the uncanny and possibly the supernatural starts to pervade the film. The tension is cranked up until by the end I was literally gritting my teeth and squirming in my seat.

This movie is smart, well directed, and scary as hell. My only complaint is that I really wanted Steve Zahn's character to die. Highly recommended. ***1/4/****

Thoughts on Black Narcissus:

I watched this for the first time the other night, having heard it is one of the Best Movies Ever. Hm. I dunno. I don't do well with melodrama, and this had it in spades. That being said, it's still a very good film, with plenty of good points.

First and foremost is Jack Cardiff's brilliant cinematography. His use of color and light is simply astounding. This is, IMHO, far and away the best aspect of the film. I may put it back on my Netflix queue for that alone.

The performances are all good, with Deborah Kerr giving a solid performance as Sister Cladagh, the leader of the nuns. The standout performance in my mind, though, came from Kathleen Byron as Sister Ruth, who gradually descends into madness.

The story revolves around a group of Anglican nuns sent from their home in Calcutta to establish a church and school in a remote village in the Himalayas. Ironically, the building they are given by the local ruler ("The General") for their sanctuary was once the residence of his concubines, and now deserted.

The central point of the movie seemed to be that these nuns, used to a cloistered existence, found the world, and worldliness, intruding on them as they lived in this remote outpost in the Himalayas. Sister Cladagh finds her mind turning to the memories of her life before she entered the service of God, and also finds herself being more and more strongly attracted to Mr. Dean, their laiaison with The General, all-around handyman, and the man Sister Ruth, in her madness, has become obsessed with. And Sister Philippa (I think), the gardener among them, finds herself planting ornamental flowers in the convent garden instead of vegetables, as planned. I wish the movie had explored the reasons for these changes a little more, although perhaps the filmmakers intended that to be ambiguous and leave it up to the audience to consider the whys and wherefores.

As I said, the movie is strong in the melodramatic department, which detracted from my enjoyment and appreciation, but there were some very strong scenes as well, and some things to consider. One of my favorite parts is when Sister Cladagh is troubled by the presence of the local holy man on the convent ground, and wishes to expel him. This is a man who just sits without speaking and apparently without sleeping, day in and day out. Why does the Sister feel so strongly about him? Is it because the local people venrate him rather than the Christian God, or is it because he leads the ascetic existence that she is unable to find? When she makes her feelings about removing him known to Mr. Dean, he simply replies: What would Jesus have done? That's the end of the argument.

Overall this is a good, if not great movie, for me anyway.

I came out of this movie liking it a lot, but the more I think about it, the more questions I have, and the worse my overall impression has become.

The story concerns Tom Mackelway (Aaron Ecjhart), a disgraced FBI agent who has just come off of six month's suspension for "forcibly extraditing" a suspected serial killer from Mexico to the U.S. Now in the Albuquerque FBI office, he soon starts receiving faxes of missing person reports from person or persons unknown.

It turns out that there is a killer out there who has murdered at least two people and is faxing clues to Mackelway. Following a trail of mutilated bodies, and clues left for them, Mackelway and his partner Fran Kulok (Carrie-Anne Moss) work to identify and find him. This killer (Ben Kingsley) also has the ability of "remote viewing," that is, seeing things from a great distance with his mind. He sends the results of these viewing sessions to Mackelway, but why? That is one of the many questions Mackelway (and the audience) have to answer.

This is one of those movies that I have very mixed feelings about. On the one hand, the performances are all good, especially Ben Kingsley's. I swear, it's getting a little boring at how consistently great this guy is. It's too bad he doesn't make much of an appearance until about the halfway point of the movie. E. Elias Merhige's direction is good, but nothing memorable (although Kingsley's remote viewing sessions are pretty intriguing). The failure of this movie comes with the script. It's a mess.By the time the movie was over, there were so many loose ends and unanswered questions that my sense of closure and satisfaction was diminished somewhat.

Maybe I'm being a little hard on Suspect Zero, because there's a lot of good here. Some of the ideas put forward are really intriguing. The trouble is, there are too many of them and what impact some of them might have had is diluted. But like I say, there's some cool stuff and good performances, and the final confrontation between Kingsley and Eckart is powerful. It certainly wasn't a waste of time so much as a waste of potential.

Another terrific suspense film from Henri-Georges Clouzot, Les Diaboliques (also known as "Diabolique") is a tense story of murder, suspicion and revenge. The plot revolves around two women, Christina (Vera Clouzot) and Nicole (Simone Signoret) who conspire to murder the brutish man who is Christina's husband and Nicole's lover Michel, played by the delightfully sullen Paul Meurisse. He is the principal of a boarding school for boys who relies on Vera's money to support his excesses, and the two women are both teachers at the school.

Vera has her doubts about committing murder, even though Michel is incredibly abusive. But Nicole convinces her to help drug and then drown Michel. All seems to be going well until Michels body goes missing and the two women turn against each other. The situation is complicated further by the appearance of a retired police inspector who is determined to help Vera find her "missing" husband, despite the poor woman's protests. The tension continues to mount until the hair-raising climax.

This movie is on a par with some of Hitchcock's best work, although Clouzot doesn't mix much humor in with the suspense, as Hitch often did. However, Vera's interaction with the droll inspector does provides some chuckles. Unlike his previous film, The Wages Of Fear, Clouzot doesn't spend a whole lot of time on the set-up of the plot, but gets right to the meat of the matter, and from there Diabolique rolls along very quickly with barely a letup in the action.

I can't believe it took me so long to see this masterpiece. Highly recommended.

Shaun and Ed are two twenty-something slacker roommates. Shaun spends his days working, playing video games, and hanging out at the pub. Ed does pretty much the same thing, except for the working part. Shaun's world takes a turn for the worse when, sensing that their life is going nowhere, his girlfriend Liz breaks up with him. Then things really get bad when zombies start showing up in his neighborhood (and everywhere else).

Soon after realizing that The Dead Are Walking The Earth (nothing gets by these blokes), Shaun and Ed decide to rescue Shaun's mother and father (excuse me, that's step-father), Liz and her two roommates, and find a safe place to hole up, which turns out to be the pub, of course. In the course of this, they have to fend off zombies with everything from cricket bats to record albums. Predictably, things just go from bad to worse for the team.

Shaun Of The Dead is a rare creature: a film that effectively mixes humor and horror. I haven't seen a movie that does it this well since An American Werewolf In London. In the beginning there are lotsa laughs, giving way more and more to the horror elements as the film nears its conclusion. But even when things are at their most horrific this movie will surprise you with some hilarious bits. There are even a few moments that tug on the heartstrings a bit; something I hadn't expected at all.

Most of the performances are good, and the directing, camera-work and editing are all great. The brilliant script is filled with sharp-edged satire (many of the humans in the beginning are very zombie-like to begin with), and jokes aplenty. One of my favorite bits is when Shaun and Ed are fending off a couple of zombies with records from Shaun's collection, choosing only the bad ones to fling at the undead:

Ed: Purple Rain Shaun: No Ed: Stone Roses Shaun: Definitely not. Ed: Batman soundtrack? Shaun: Throw it.

If you have a strong stomach and a good sense of humor, you should see this movie, and soon.

I first saw this remake of Henri-Georges Clouzot's The Wages Of Fear when it was first released, and instantly fell in love with it. Sad to say, that was before I had seen the original, which is far superior. Not to say that this is a bad movie; far from it.

The plot involves four low lifes on the run (an American gangster (Roy Scheider), an Italian assassin (Francisco Rabal), a Palestinian terrorist (Amidou), and a French embezzler (Bruno Cremer)). They are all hiding out in a small village in Venezuela, which has to be the armpit of the universe. They are offered a way out of their miserable existence when an oil well 200 miles away catches fire and they have to haul the nitroglycerin needed to blow it out. Thus these four men in two trucks embark on a dangerous, harrowing journey towards death or salvation.

This is my third viewing of Sorcerer (the title comes from the word painted on the side of one of the trucks), and my first viewing after seeing The Wages Of Fear. Friedkin does an admirable job, and has some incredible set-pieces (the bridge crossing in particular is gut-wrenchingly tense), and the acting by all the principles is good, although Scheider does go a little over the top from time to time. The set design is also quite good (I especially liked the surreal landscape towards the end of the journey).

The problems come in the script by Walon Green. In the original, Clouzot knew that the character development and the interaction between the men was of the utmost importance, and their histories didn't matter all that much. In Sorcerer, Friedkin and Green opt to show the backstories of each of these men. Maybe they thought that knowing their history would give the audience more empathy with their characters. Since these guys are all pretty much scumbags (with the possible exception of the French banker), I suspect that it had more to do with the fact that they could show some cool explosions and car chases in the first hour.

Thus we are left with a very stylish movie that has some great action and suspense sequences, but lacks the soul of the original. For those who like action or adventure movies, though, I'd still recommend it.

I've heard a lot about this film and finally got around to watching it tonight. I have to say that most of the praise I had heard was well deserved. This is a great debut film for Coppola.

The Lisbon family is your typical suburban household. There's Mom and Dad and their five daughters, aged 13 through 17. All the girls are beautiful, but beyond the reach of any of the boys at school. After the youngest daughter, Cecelia, commits suicide, and another event that I won't spoil, the girls are kept in virtual isolation by their religiously strict parents. This starts them all on a slow downward spiral of self-destruction.

This movie is a lot funnier than you would think from the synopsis, but there really is a lot of humor throughout. The cinematography is great, with excellent use of light and color, and the performances are all good, especially from Kathleen Turner and James Woods who are both brilliant as the well-meaning but clueless parents. But there's something missing here. Parts were funny, and parts were charming, but I never really cared about any of the girls the way I thought I should. I never came close to shedding a tear in what should have been a heart-wrenching story.

The Virgin Suicides is very well done, beautiful, funny, and gives you plenty to think about afterwards, but....I dunno...it seemed a tad shallow. Funny, these are almost the exact same comments I made about Lost In Translation. I guess I just don't get Sofia Coppola. I liked this one much better than LiT, though, and it gets my recommendation (for whatever that's worth).

Can I give a film a 7 1/2 rating? If so, this one gets it. Better than a 7, but not quite up to an 8.

What's the perfect date movie? What's the perfect '80s movie? Hell, what's the perfect romantic formula movie? Say Anything, that's what. Perfect script, perfect protagonist in John Cusack, perfect antagonist in John Mahoney, and the love interest, Ione Skye, may be less than perfect but she's still pretty good.

John Cusack oozes cool as Lloyd Dobler, a smart, garrulous slacker who has set his sights on the smartest girl in school, Diane Court (Ione Skye). It doesn't take long for Diane to fall for Lloyd, and he for her. The fly in the ointment is, of course, Diane's overprotective father, played with sympathetic brilliance by John Mahoney.

I was surprised to learn that this was Cameron Crowe's debut movie as director. Surprised because his direction is so deft and assured, the editing damn near perfect, and the performances he gets out of every single person in the cast so wonderful.

Nods also go to Lily Tyler and Joan Cusack (but especially Lily) for their hilarious performances as Loyd's friend and sister, respectively.

Sorry if I gush, but I do love this movie. If you haven't seen it, do so, preferably with someone you love.

The Wages Of Fear is a damn near perfect suspense thriller. The story concerns four men, broke, desperate, and stranded in a small town somewhere in South America (Venezuela, I presume). They are offered a way out of their miserable existence when an oil well catches fire three hundred miles away and the oil company needs four men to drive the nitroglycerin to the site to blow it out. The trouble is that the three hundred miles they have to drive is some of the most rugged, hostile terrain imaginable.

The tension and suspense is palpable during the driving scenes, but what takes this movie to a whole other level is that it takes the time to familiarize the audience with these men. We feel like we know them, and sympathize with them before the journey starts. The whole cast is great and believable, and it wasn't long before I truly forgot I was watching actors in a fictional film. These men made it real, as did the brilliant direction of Henri-Georges Clouzot.

Clouzot's style is gritty and realistic, with cuts between the trucks and close-ups of their actions (hands on the shift lever, feet on the pedals, etc) serving to heighten the tension. The lack of a musical score also lends a sense of realism and helps to bring home the sense of loneliness and isolation felt by these men.

Highly recommended.

What a great, great film! If you're looking for horror, though, look elsewhere. Bubba has some horror elements, certainly, but it's mostly a comedy-drama with a ton of heart. Ossie Davis is great as always and Bruce Campbell has never been better as an actor. In the past, I've always thought of him as a character actor, but in Bubba Ho-Tep, Bruce is Elvis.

But the real star of this movie is the script: goddamn it's good! Plenty of cool one-liners are sprinkled throughout, but there are also some great quiet moments with Elvis' reminiscences and introspection. He's not just The King, but a King filled with sadness for what he's become and regret for the loss of his wife and daughter. But now he's given the chance to be the hero he always pretended to be.

Add to this a close to perfect musical score by Brian Tyler, and it adds up to one of the best films I've seen in quite a while.

I just watched Ravenous again last night. I saw it the first time when it was originally released, and had forgotten what a great movie it is!

This thing sucked me in right from the get-go. It spends about 15 minutes on exposition and character introduction, and then gets right to the...if you'll excuse the expression...meat of the film. The movie takes place during the Spanish-American War, and concerns a Captain John Boyd (Guy Pearce), who is assigned to Fort Spencer, an isolated outpost in the western Sierra Nevada Mountains. He arrives in the dead of winter to find that he one in a company of only eight people inhabiting the fort (it's the off season, apparently).

Soon after Boyd's arrival, another visitor arrives at Fort Spencer: a Mr. F.W. Calhoun (Robert Carlyle). He is the last survivor of a party of pioneers who got lost in the mountains, and were forced to take shelter in a cave from a winter storm; a storm that left them snowed in and unable to continue on. He tells a horrific tale that sounds like it was lifted straight from the Donner party: first they ate the oxen, then the horses, then their belts and shoes, and then…. well…one of the party died and… Fearing for his life, Calhoun fled when there were only three of the party left, and made his way to Fort Spencer.

The commander of the Fort, Colonel Hart (Jeffrey Jones) mounts a search party, Boyd among them, to try and rescue the remaining members of Calhoun's expedition. They eventually find the cave, and Boyd and Private Reich (Neal McDonough) go inside to investigate. Once inside, they find what is left of the pioneer band. And then the real horror begins.

There is so much good stuff in this movie that I hardly know where to begin. The director, Antonia Bird, has a way of making the audience (well, me at least) feel the isolation of these men, and how out of touch they are with the rest of the world; of how truly alone they are. The characters are all well drawn, and one can find sympathy for even the worst of them. The performances are all good, although it seemed like David Arquette's character didn't have much to do; just giggle and act stoned most of the time (not much of a stretch). But all in all they seemed like real people to me; people who were in this fix, not just characters spouting lines in a play.

The music was kind of hit and miss. Sometimes the twanging folksy sound seemed out of place with what was happening on the screen, but at other times it hit just the right note, sending shivers down my spine.

This is not a movie for the squeamish. It is a story of cannibalism, of superstition and mystical power. It invokes the spirit of vampires drinking the blood of men and werewolves tearing at human flesh, and the ancient Indian legend of the wendigo

Ravenous is a reminder that not all monsters have fangs or masks or razor-tipped fingers. There are monsters who are handsome, cultured and well spoken, and that's what makes them all the more horrifying.

I was surprised at how good this was, considering I had never heard of it. The characters are well developed, and the cast all put in good performances.

Something is out in the desert, and it seems to need people, or at least parts of them, to survive. A team of miners heads out to investigate the disappearance of some of their compatriots, and run into big trouble.

The pacing of the movie is good, allowing things to build before the real scares start. The creature effects ranged from so-so to pretty damn good.

I just got done watching a movie I've never heard of: Angels Crest.

This is something I picked up at the local Hollywood Video store, just on a whim. It's not a horror movie, but a very satisfying psychological thriller.

To tell you anything about it would be to ruin it for anyone who's going to see it. But I will say that it is an excellent example of what can be done on a small budget. The writing is excellent, the directing and photography are great, and the acting is first rate. Also, the film quality is very good, so it doesn't have the look of many low-budget movies. Oh, and the music is quite good, too.

This was directed by J. Michael Couto, someone I'll be looking for in the future.

***1/2/****

Have you ever watched a movie and thought that somehow it should be better than it is? That's the feeling I got watching Narc. Jason Patric and Ray Liotta put in workmanlike performances, and Joe Carnahan's gritty, dynamic direction keeps things moving right along. But all in all, the film as a whole felt like it was less than the sum of its parts.

That's not to say it's bad; Ray Liotta is especially good, outshining Patric, who looks a little like Dennis Miller on quaaludes. And Carnahan's use of the split-screen worked for a while, but it started to wear a bit thin by the end of the movie. Still and all, it was a good time, and provided enough twists to keep me guessing.

6/10

Being the father of a nine-year-old girl, I expect I have to face the fact that I'll be watching a lot of fantasy romances. It's too bad that most of them won't be as good as Ever After.

In this retelling of the Cinderella story, sans magic, Drew Barrymore stars as the downtrodden but feisty stepdaughter of the deliciously evil Anjelica Huston. Sure, there are plot holes, and problems with logic (what's the French court doing out in the countryside, anyway?), but who cares? Ever After overcomes any objection I might otherwise have had with charm, sweetness, and heart.

Effortless direction, sterling performances and a lush score help to breathe life into an old story. But the real star here is the writing. It takes skill to turn such a well-known tale into something fresh and new. The idea of having the visiting Leonardo da Vinci (played to perfection by Patrick Godfrey) serve as the fairy godmother was brilliant, and the denouement, where Huston's evil stepmother is brought low, is wonderfully done.

The only possible sour notes in this film are Dougray Scott as a rather flat prince, and Megan Dodds who, as the wicked stepsister was way, way over the top.

8/10

This has always been one of my favorite science fiction/horror movies from the 1950s.

This is an existential science fiction movie. Man alone against the universe is always a powerful topic, and writer Richard Matheson, who adapted his own novel for the screen, does an admirable job. Grant Williams' character isn't fighting aliens or demons, but rather the extraordinary circumstance of his mysterious shrinking, and the unforeseen consequences of his ever-dwindling size.

I love the fight with the spider, but my favorite part of the movie is the final monologue. It adds another half a star to an already extraordinary film.

A great new take on the werewolf genre of horror films. Two sullen, isolated sisters run afoul of a local lycanthrope, with some unexpected results. The interaction between the sisters, and how their relationship changes in the course of the movie lend this film a depth I had not expected. Strong performances, and some interesting new ideas make this the best werewolf movie I've seen since An American Werewolf In London.

I just watched The Dresser this evening, having only seen it once before, about a dozen years ago.

It's not a "big" movie, and doesn't try to make a big splash, but my God, the brilliance of the two leads leaves me just about speechless. Albert Finney and Tom Courtenay are nothing less than amazing in this movie.

The Dresser is the story of Sir, an aging Shakespearean actor (Finney), and his dresser Norman (Courtenay), sort of a valet, putting on a production of King Lear during the blitz of London in World War II. These are two men, each dependent upon the other: Sir is almost helpless without the aid of Norman to cajole, wheedle, and bully him into getting onstage for his 227th performance of Lear. And Norman lives his life vicariously through Sir; without Sir to need him, he is nothing, or thinks he is, anyway.

This is a character-driven film; the plot is secondary to the interaction of the characters, and as such, it requires actors of the highest caliber to bring it to life. Finney, only 47 years old, is completely believable as a very old, very sick, petulant, bullying, but brilliant stage actor. He hisses and fumes at his fellow actors even when they're taking their bows! And Courtenay is no less convincing as the mincing dresser, who must sometimes act more as a mother than as a valet to his elderly employer. Employer is really the wrong term to use, though. For although, technically their relationship is that of employer and employee, most of the time Sir and Norman act like nothing so much as an old married couple.

Yes, there are others in the cast of this movie, but there is no question that the true stars are Finney, Courtenay, and the marvelous script by Ronald Harwood. That is not to say that there aren't other fine performances, most notably Eileen Atkins as the long-suffering stage manager Madge. There is a wonderful scene where Sir and Madge talk about old desires, old regrets, and what might have been.

Although it doesn't get talked about these days, it is worth remembering that The Dresser was nominated for five Academy Awards: Best Actor nominations for both Finney and Courtenay, Best Picture, Best Director (Peter Yates), and Best Adapted Screenplay.

I had remembered this as being a good movie, but I wasn't prepared to be as completely mesmerized as I was from beginning to end. If you want to see an example of what great acting is all about, and be hugely entertained all the while, then I encourage you to see The Dresser.

I dislike E.T. because ever time I watch it, I feel like I'm being emotionally manipulated by a series of cutesy images, plot mechanisms that defy logic, and a score that is WAY over the top.

E.T. is supposed to be an intelligent being, capable of interstellar travel, but in this movie, he is relegated to the role, basically, of a child, and acts as such. I guess that's part of the point of the movie: the parallels between E.T. and Elliot (yes, I know: Elliot's initials are ET). That they are each lost and lonely, one in his own world, the other in a place far from home. But even understanding that does not make this movie any more palatable to me. I guess I wanted a more mature treatment of the little guy.

An example of the plot doing this movie in for me is arguably the most famous scene from this movie: the flying bicycles. The whole movie E.T. has presumably been in great danger of discovery, and is apparently unable to help himself. But when he and the kids are being chased on their bikes, not only is he able to levitate Elliot's bike, but all the rest of them, too! Sorry, but my reaction to that was `Where the HECK did that come from?' (For the record, and so you don't think I'm completely heartless, I do love the image of the bikes in front of the moon).

Lastly is John Williams' overpowering score. When I listen to his music as part of a movie, I feel like I'm being hit over the head with a sledgehammer.

All right, so I'm an ogre for not liking E.T., and my children will doubtless grow up to be delinquents, but it's the way I feel. I do think he took the easy way out in creating something with broad appeal: he did it not through character development and growth, but through a series of cute images and gimmicks.

The Haunting is my favorite horror movie, bar none. The reason I feel so strongly about it is that it achieves its scares without showing any blood, monsters, or madmen. It's purely through masterfully mounting suspense, unexplained noises, and odd camera angles that it creates the desired effect.

I also like the way the film works on several levels. First, the fact that the house is, indeed haunted, But there is also the psychological aspect: Eleanor has a seemingly fragile psyche, and needs desperately to belong. She not only falls under the spell of the house, but also that of Dr. Markway, who (seemingly) unintentionally leads her on.

The character of Theo, the psychic, is also an interesting one. I have always wondered how much of the way in which her lesbianism is subtly introduced was the idea of the director to begin with, and how much of it was due to the convention of the times. It's very entertaining to watch Theo come on pretty strongly to Eleanor, only to be rebuffed, and then watch her reaction when Eleanor displays her obvious attraction to Dr. Markway.

Russ Tamblyn is perfect as the devout skeptic who, by the end of the movie, becomes an equally devout believer in the supernatural.

The unusual camera angles and lenses used throughout the movie also lend an air of things not being quite right. In many parts of the film, we're not quite sure how much of Eleanor's disorientation is due to the house, and how much is due to her own imagination gone wild. But there is no doubt that something is in the house: the pounding on the walls and the doors of some unseen force, the whispers and cries in the night, and of course, the great oak door bending inwards as though made of rubber. No, something is certainly there.

In the end, Eleanor succumbs, and as she is forced to drive away from the house, unseen hands take control of the steering wheel and force the car into a tree, killing her instantly. Or were they unseen hands? Perhaps it was Eleanor's own tortured mind taking control and refusing to let her leave. After all, in dying she had finally found a place where she belongs.

This is a pretty straightforward story of violence, revenge , regret, and (presumably) redemption. The characters aren't very deep, the plot is linear and predictable, and I honestly didn't care much for the virginal victim. (Perhaps that was part of the point, that the audience, like Inge, would secretly be hoping for something bad to happen to her, and we share in her guilt when it does). But even if that's so, this movie (for me) doesn't rise to the heights to which some people have raised it. I will watch it again, though, and try to see some of the underlying meanings that have been espoused by some reviewers. But for now, The Seventh Seal stands head and shoulders above The Virgin Spring, at least for me.

A classic vehicle for Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn, this is one of the first modern movies to take a strong look at the battle of the sexes and women's equality. Some of the scenes seem a bit dated, but the chemistry between the leads is delightful, and there is some role-reversal that lends a sense of originality that I hadn't expected

SPOILERS ABOUND!!!!

`Last night I dreamt I was at Manderly again.' As with Daphne DuMaurier's novel, so begins Alfred Hitchcock's classic film adaptation, and the only one of his films to be awarded an Academy Award for Best Picture. It should also be noted that the film also won an Oscar for Best Cinematography, Black and White. Hitchcock, Fontaine, Olivier, and Anderson were also nominated in their respective categories.

Rebecca was Alfred Hitchcock's first American movie, and much has been written about the interference by David O. Selznick with its production. That is not the purpose of this review, though. Frankly, I don't know all that much about what went on behind the scenes, but I do know that the resulting film is a masterpiece.

Rebecca can be divided into three parts: Monte Carlo, Manderly, and the inquest after the discovery of Rebecca' sunken boat.

At Monte Carlo, we are introduced to Joan Fontaine's character, a complete nonentity (in fact, we never learn her real name) who is serving as a paid companion to Mrs. Van Hopper, an obnoxious, wealthy matron delightfully played by Florence Bates. While there, she meets George Fortescu Maximillian de Winter (Maxim for short,played by Laurence Olivier), fabulously wealthy and as charming as Mrs. Van Hopper is boorish. Maxim has been traveling trying to recover from his first wife Rebecca's untimely death in a drowning accident. At the end of her stay at Monte Carlo, the young woman is surprised to have Maxim ask her to marry him, although not with as much romance as she would probably have liked, and much to the consternation of her erstwhile employer Mrs. Van Hopper.

The movie then takes us to Manderly, the palatial family estate of the de Winter family. Here Fontaine's character truly finds herself out of her depth as the new mistress of Manderly. Not only has she never had to deal with such a large house and a retinue of servants, but she gets a decidedly chilly reception from Mrs. Danvers (Judith Anderson), and everywhere she goes and everyone with whom she speaks reminds her of the beauty and accomplishments of Rebecca. She feels overwhelmed by the specter of Maxim's first wife and of his abiding love for her. Not only that, but Fontaine's character is treated like a child, both in Monte Carlo and at Manderly, whether it is in the dismissive way of Mrs. Van Hopper, the fatherly manner of Maxim, or in the gently patronizing way of Frith, Manderly's head butler. One gets the feeling that the new Mrs. de Winter is a child lost in this great house, afraid of making any false steps.

Judith Anderson is amazing as Mrs. Danvers. Although she never raises her voice, and always speaks with seeming respect to her new mistress, Anderson nonetheless allows Mrs. Danver's malevolence to come through. She is the archetype for all the cold-hearted housekeepers who have come since, and none can match her. She never lets Mrs. de Winter forget Rebecca and how she was loved by everyone, especially Maxim. Haunted by the specter of Rebecca, the new Mrs. de Winter seems to feel like an intruder, trespassing on Rebecca's home and sleeping in her bed.

Mrs. Danvers finally reveals the depth of her hatred by suggesting a costume for Mrs. de Winter to wear at a party that was originally worn by Rebecca. After Maxim's expected negative reaction, Mrs. Danvers urges her, in arguably the most memorable scene in the movie, to commit suicide by throwing herself from the window. Mrs. de Winter is saved, though, by the wreck of a boat near Manderly and the noise of the rescue that is undertaken.

During the course of the rescue, another boat is found: the one in which Rebecca died. Having discovered Rebecca's corpse inside, it is announced that an inquest must take place to investigate her death. When his wife tries to comfort Maxim, he reveals to her the truth behind his relationship with Rebecca: that he hated her, and was trapped by her into a sham of a marriage. He also tells her of how Rebecca died; that he had killed her in a rage and sunk the boat with her body inside. After this revelation, a change comes over the new Mrs. de Winter: she grows up, and is visibly more self-assured. She and Maxim, to a certain extent, reverse roles, in that he loses hope and she must comfort him and reassure him that all will be well, when in fact all seems hopeless. She is now truly the mistress of Manderly.

During the inquest, it is discovered that Rebecca's boat was scuttled, and had not capsized as was previously thought. Circumstantial evidence begins to pile up against Maxim, until a visit to Rebecca's personal physician reveals her ultimate betrayal and clears Maxim's name.

Rebecca is, essentially, a drama of mystery and romance, and in lesser hands it could easily fall into the trap of melodrama. But Hitchcock's deft direction, the superb cinematography, and the outstanding performances by the entire cast make it one of the greatest romances ever made, and one of my favorite films.